Register here

Author Topic: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement  (Read 3719 times)

Offline Harrier

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 827
  • BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 09:40:02 am by harrier »
BAe P.1216 Supersonic ASTOVL Aircraft: www.harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm

100 Years  - Camel, Hurricane, Harrier: www.kingstonaviation.org

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7414
  • _ \\ //
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2012, 07:55:35 am »
Some old CGI of the CAMM in action (on a BMT Venator):



EDIT: Woops! Forgot that TinWing had already posted the same video over in the old thread.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 08:15:46 am by Grey Havoc »
To the Stars

Online bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8221
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline JohnR

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 353
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2016, 10:07:10 pm »
Has anyone heard what the missile load on the T23's will be when refitted?  I know that effectively they could be fitted at a ratio of 4 to 1 Sea Wolves, but I somehow can't see the MOD stretching to a 128 missiles per ship?  Is the VLS well on the T23's deep enough to take any other weapon?

Regards.

Online fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2017, 01:50:25 am »

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2559
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2017, 07:59:30 am »
Well, that belatedly answers JohnR's question from last year.  Looks like a 1:1 replacement of Sea Wolf with Sea Ceptor in the Type 23s.

Online fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2017, 02:46:32 am »
2nd firing trials.  Is the pedigree of this missile connected to ASRAAM (analogous to RAM missile heritage with Sidewinder)?


Offline lastdingo

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 493
  • Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
    • Defence and Freedom blog
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2017, 03:49:56 am »
RAM shares IR sensor elements with Stinger IIRC, but CAMM is a ASRAAM modified for use as SAM with active radar seeker. Fire control by platform has huge commonality with PAAMS (~Aster).

------------------
Personal opinion
I think CAMM makes little sense because it's too short-ranged to justify the expense of an active radar seeker.
Even the extended range version is of little good - the biggest improvement over Aster 15 is the more compact VLS.

My hopes are for AMRAAM-ER and for naval purposes the quad-packed ESSM Blk II.
Maybe the latter even gets a AESA antenna as some of the newest Russian and Japanese A2A missiles designs.

Online fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #8 on: May 30, 2018, 03:11:04 am »
Land based version live fire test.


Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10522
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #9 on: May 30, 2018, 05:47:33 am »
RAM shares IR sensor elements with Stinger IIRC, but CAMM is a ASRAAM modified for use as SAM with active radar seeker. Fire control by platform has huge commonality with PAAMS (~Aster).

------------------
Personal opinion
I think CAMM makes little sense because it's too short-ranged to justify the expense of an active radar seeker.
Even the extended range version is of little good - the biggest improvement over Aster 15 is the more compact VLS.

My hopes are for AMRAAM-ER and for naval purposes the quad-packed ESSM Blk II.
Maybe the latter even gets a AESA antenna as some of the newest Russian and Japanese A2A missiles designs.

Sounds like a relatively expensive, less capable, TOR.  On the other hand, while active radar sounds expensive, are they ALL expensive?  Big difference between a bleeding edge AESA seeker (like the one Japan and UK are looking at for Meteor) and active seeker on LM's Miniature Hit-to-Kill.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2018, 06:52:11 am by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement
« Reply #10 on: May 30, 2018, 07:01:48 am »
Seeker's SE would involve the target set. One thing to design something that is Low-Cost and targeted towards CRAM and small UAS, while another that has to have the capability to go after fixed and rotary winged aircraft with ECM. The Army has had a few low-cost seeker programs, even looking at phased array seeker options..
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown